In a victory for common sense, America’s largest trading partner has become the first country to bail on the Kyoto Protocol before the nearly $7 billion in non-compliance costs comes due next year. Thus ends a pointless and pricey exercise in martyrdom.
Having committed to reducing 1990 level carbon emissions by 6%, Canada somehow managed to go in the other direction by 33%. Not that anyone in Canada would have noticed by any tangible common-sense measure, except perhaps for all the Canadian plants and trees quietly cheering the abundance of carbon dioxide and overproducing fresh oxygen as a result.

So what exactly is the almighty valid scientific reason for which a well-managed country with a natural resource based economy would purposely choose to sacrifice its competitive advantage amid economic uncertainty, particularly when oil and natural resource competitor Russia has a mandate to reduce its emissions by exactly zero, and America wisely didn’t even sign the agreement?

Environmentalism is all feel-good fun and games until taxpayers get mugged. Times and priorities have changed and scammy, silly nonsense like taxing and trading in plant food credits has lost its luster. Protesters are already complaining about Wall Street. We really don’t need yet another dodgier market system to hear them whine about.

Carbon reduction is just a luxury pastime, and arguably a useless one. Where can you breathe better: “carbon-dumping” Canada or Europe? I rest my case.

Europe has long been proudly fiddling with carbon credits both amongst themselves and on the world stage. Good for them. Given the current economic state of the Eurozone, it’s obvious they’ve been busy debating wallpaper samples while the bulldozer rolls full-speed towards the house. Good luck saving the world when you can’t pay the rent. Europe will probably keep trying to impose its moral example through climate change activism, even when they’re in debt to China and Russia, each of which have zero Kyoto obligations.

A country can choose to pay for its guilt with actions rather than cash. Nice racket. So Canada may have been able to reduce its billions owing with “do-gooder credits,” furiously running around the world planting trees, French-kissing rainbow trout, hosting one rock concert on Arctic ice floes featuring Bono for every gigatonne of carbon spewed, or something else equally absurd.

Canadian Conservative PartyPrime Minister Stephen Harper reiterated at a Toronto press conference this week that his government was committed to working with the private sector in the ongoing development of emissions reduction technology, thereby differentiating between a heartfelt morally genuine effort and a crippling, politically-foisted necessity.

Existing gentlemen’s agreements between provinces and American regions on emission reduction might be a fun distraction from practical life, like a badminton league or hockey pool. They should never have been parlayed into something that costs anyone more than a beer, let alone billions.

Canadian opposition parties predictably whined about not being allowed to tag along with the Environment Minister to the recent Durban summit where they were hoping to run around profusely apologizing for the government’s lack of sensitivity in saving Canadian taxpayers a multi-billion dollar bill. One member even called the Minister a “piece of s**t” aloud in parliament upon his return.

The Liberal Party’s environment critic accused Harper’s government of ignoring the “science” of this: “While the world emits 48 gigatonnes of carbon each year, most models suggest that emissions need to drop to 44 gigatonnes by 2020 to maintain a likely chance (66%) of remaining under 2 degrees Celsius. The reality is if all current commitments are added together, a gap of 6–11 gigatonnes remains, and the longer we wait to take action on climate change, the more expensive it will be.”

Harper should have responded that this overwrought, overfunded reasoning can be alleviated, according to bought scientific consensus, by running 6 to 11 million barrels of Canadian crude (or Molson Canadian beer) over a leftist brain at 102F to maintain a 66% chance of reducing its temperature to 98F by 2050.

The Socialist NDP official opposition leader added: “While the Harper Conservatives are causing Canada to fall behind, the rest of the world is moving forward in the new energy economy.”

Good for “the rest of the world.” Have fun playing with your new taxes. The rest of us have real problems to deal with.

Post navigation

Vel Craft Search +4000 Articles

Constitutional Republic Of The United States

True Federalism.

“The way to have good and safe government is not to trust it all to one, but to divide it among the many, distributing to every one exactly the functions he is competent to.

Let the national government be entrusted with the defense of the nation, and its foreign and federal relations; the State governments with the civil rights, law, police, and administration of what concerns the State generally; the counties with the local concerns of the counties, and each ward direct the interests within itself.

It is by dividing and subdividing these republics from the great national one down through all its subordinations, until it ends in the administration of every man’s farm by himself; by placing under every one what his own eye may superintend, that all will be done for the best.

What has destroyed liberty and the rights of man in every government which has ever existed under the sun? The generalizing and concentrating all cares and powers into one body.”

– Thomas Jefferson

Unconstitutional Powers By Repetition

Usurpations by one branch of government, of powers entrusted to a coequal branch, are not rendered constitutional by repetition.

The United States Supreme Court held unconstitutional hundreds of laws enacted by Congress over the course of five decades that included a legislative veto of executive actions in INS v. Chada, 462 U.S. 919 (1982).